Talk:Characters
Well, I've divided the characters in Something in the Sea into the ones who are original and ones from the game that only get a passing mention (I left the Big Sister in, because she has actually played a part in Something in the Sea).Sylocat 01:26, November 20, 2009 (UTC) Detail How detailed do we want the characters page to be when it comes to briefly mentioned characters? Gregory is listed, and doesn't even have a page... There are names everywhere! For example, there is another doctor's name on a medical pavilion sign, another name on the tombstones in the tea garden, subject's numbers on Steinman's "art". Category I'm thinking the chars should be labeled as "Major", "Minor", and "Other". With major referring to the main chars, minor referring to chars seen in the game, and other referring to chars that were only mentioned. What say you? EDlTOR 07:15, December 14, 2009 (UTC) Sounds good to me. I guess the mentioned characters would not have their own pages? ~'Gardimuer' [[User talk:Gardimuer|{ ʈalk }]] 08:04, December 14, 2009 (UTC) I was thinking either the mentioned characters would have a "Mentioned Characters" page, listing names, locations, etc... or they could just be listed under "Mentioned Characters" on the characters page. EDlTOR 08:09, December 14, 2009 (UTC) :I think just listing them (and maybe having brief info on where they are mentioned) in this article should be enough. ~'Gardimuer' [[User talk:Gardimuer|{ ʈalk }]] 08:17, December 14, 2009 (UTC) Do you think we should sort the other characters by first name or last? If we do first, we can't group families together. EDlTOR 19:26, December 14, 2009 (UTC) :Hm. I was thinking it might be nice to group them by the level they are mentioned in, so it will be easier for people to find them in game... Maybe group them by level and then by last name? ~'Gardimuer' [[User talk:Gardimuer|{ ʈalk }]] 03:09, December 15, 2009 (UTC) Splitting This Page It has been suggested that this page be split into separate pages for each game and Something in the Sea. The advantages of splitting are: *With BioShock 2 coming out many more characters will be introduced. This page may get very long and complicated when that happens. *If we split this page into separate character pages for each game, then the different articles can be linked from the sidebar. I.e, on the sidebar the BioShock section would have a link to the "BioShock Characters" page, and the BioShock 2 section would have a link to "BioShock 2 Characters". Leave any objections/comments/suggestions below. ~'Gardimuer' [[User talk:Gardimuer|{ ʈalk }]] 05:43, December 17, 2009 (UTC) That's fine... but, it should also be done with the audio diaries page as well, so all of the main pages we have follow the same formatting. [[User:BlueIsSupreme|'BlueIsSupreme']] 20:12, December 17, 2009 (UTC) Well not that anybody really listens to Me but I say you go on with it.Delta daddie 07:42, December 21, 2009 (UTC) Spliting the article I think we should keep it the way it is. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • ) 02:25, 20 December 2009. Please remember to sign your posts with ~~~~. SIGH Hey all, bad news... SIGH... It turns out that ALL of the diary character pictures are vertically stretched. I snapped them in widescreen... I will fix this ASAP. Sorry 'bout that. :( EDlTʘR •taIk• 07:10, December 21, 2009 (UTC) Fixed the images... sorry... EDlTʘR •taIk• 08:10, December 21, 2009 (UTC) Using References At the moment, we have a small description for every one-off mentioned character in the respective games/DLCs. Example: Burke - A man violently killed in an accident at a fishery, mentioned by Zigo d'Acosta. Though it isn't hurting anyone, I do think it would look a bit cleaner if we would take the reference section in use.(?) Example: Burke1 1Zigo d'Acosta's Audio Diary: Occupational Hazards or 1Zigo d'Acosta's Audio Diary: Occupational Hazards. He was violently killed in an accident at a fishery. I would personally make the transition, of course any help is appreciated. --Shacob (talk) 12:13, October 24, 2015 (UTC) :Sounds like a good idea to me, and I'll gladly help with changing to references. —'Mainframe98 talk·blog· ' 12:53, October 24, 2015 (UTC) Great! I'll go in chronological order. --Shacob (talk) 13:25, October 24, 2015 (UTC) :It looks really good! Definitely an improvement over the previous approach. —'Mainframe98 talk·blog· ' 14:35, October 24, 2015 (UTC)